Welcome to the Lounge

The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.

I'd assumed that it was because I answered what is essentially a programming question in the lounge, seen perhaps as encouraging the practise.

I believe you are right and I countered the vote because he has only done it once, got a warning and hopefully learned his lesson. But if he does it again then all bets are off and flame retardant clothing would be advised.

I was digging around looking for a USB cable in my bin of old computer parts and I came across a PS/2 mouse and was about to toss it when I realized it had a ball. It's been so long for me that I'd forgotten the good old days of trying to get the pointer on that one spot off the screen and then popping off the ball and scraping the gunk off the rollers.

I have a need for software that will let me:1. split a video feed into individual frames (JPEG)2. stitch individual frames back into a video feed (preferably MPEG-4)3. allow me to change the nominal 'size' (resolution) of the video. i.e. the number of pixels.4. Can be batch driven.

Please note that in-stream editing of a video is NOT what I'm after at all, I have to be able to manipulate each individual frame and then reassemble the video from them.

Any recommendations? Open Source libraries are preferred, but anything with free or reasonable licensing that isn't a total processor hog is OK too.

Thanks,Lee H

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Cool - thank you.Found a piece of text that looks like what I was after under:<a href="http://ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.html#Video-and-Audio-file-format-conversion">http://ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.html#Video-and-Audio-file-format-conversion</a>[<a href="http://ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.html#Video-and-Audio-file-format-conversion" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>]and the text:"You can extract images from a video, or create a video from many images:"

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

It was malicious for sure. I know it was unlikely there'd be a prang in that area but for goodness sake, if anyone fell onto them it could give a nasty injury. It's unlikely they will catch the scumbag that threw them on the road but here's hoping.

Give Bradley Wiggins credit for organising Cadel Evans' return to the peloton. You don't read much about good sportsmanship in many sports these days but it hopefully sets a precedent.

"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68)."I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).

The instructions given in the link page to handle a mercury spill is just ridiculous. I don't think sweeping off mercury with a broom is a good idea as this will only further break down the mercury into smaller droplets, making it harder to gather for disposal.

The lamp was still hot when he removed it, which was not the correct way to do it, and that lead to everything.

Which is of course true. However, you never made a mistake in your life?

To judge the safety of a system, don't only judge how well it works - also consider how badly it fails if it does. Furthermore, there's a past common use case of exchanging a hot bulb not being overly dangerous when e.g. handled with a towel.

Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:

One can cut their throat with a knife, which makes knives dangerous. May be we should ban knives. And screwdrivers. And pens.

Since you seem to be into weak analogies: Imagine a bulb with 99% energy efficiency, low cost, low environmental impact, long life, yadda yadda. The only downside is: when you switch it off between 11:30 and 12:30, it evaporates an entire city block around the power station.

Which is of course true. However, you never made a mistake in your life?

I make mistakes, just like everyone else. Why do you ask?

peterchen wrote:

To judge the safety of a system, don't only judge how well it works - also consider how badly it fails if it does.

So, how exactly does it count as a "failure" of the device if you remove it while it's hot, drop it on the floor, and stamp on the breakage?

peterchen wrote:

Since you seem to be into weak analogies: Imagine a bulb with 99% energy efficiency, low cost, low environmental impact, long life, yadda yadda. The only downside is: when you switch it off between 11:30 and 12:30, it evaporates an entire city block around the power station.

Even if we've to go by your clever analogies: No, I won't take a bulb that will evaporate a city, yadda yadda. Not sure why did you ask it either.

Just checking. There are some people who obviously never make mistakes and don't understand that this stuff happens, and if someone is so stupid to make a mistake, they have to carry all consequences alone, whatever they are.

Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:

So, how exactly does it count as a "failure" of the device if you remove it while it's hot, drop it on the floor, and stamp on the breakage?

It's not a failure of the device, but the system. Millions of light bulbs get bought (and probably replaced) every day - 5.5 million in the US alone. Someone, somewhere is going to be in a hurry or tired or a clumsy in the dark, and going to drop the bulb, and step into the shattered remains. Saying "uh, this must not happen" is basically accepting these accidents to happen.

Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:

Even if we've to go by your clever analogies: No, I won't take a bulb that will evaporate a city, yadda yadda. Not sure why did you ask it either.

I consider that analogy as weak as yours. It's just a massively exaggerated example to check for a limit: Whenter "The product is safe as long as it is handled correctly" makes a product safe - no matter what "correctly" means.

As I mentioned in my first post, I'm not even convinced that the news is entirely legit, and I doubt the possibilities of such destruction arising out of the misuse of a CFL bulb. Mercury vapors (that must have already escaped after the bulb breaks) is not going to rip apart someone's leg like what's shown in those pictures. Neither will such damage happen if someone just stamps on a few broken pieces of glass.

Additionally, the link is basically a blog, and not the website of a hospital, or news agency. The blog post also does not provide anything other than a couple of pictures, and the writer has provided grossly wrong information on how to handle a mercury spill (see my other posts). I doubt the whole thing is legit.

...the word "evaporate" doesn't mean what you probably think it means. You were looking for the word "vaporize", or if the city were to be burnt straight into gas from solid, it would then be "sublimate".

However - I do have experience with it when introduced to the human body. Following an accident involving Mercury Fulminate many years ago, I was unfortunate enough to receive a cut to the face from something that had just been covered in hot mercury vapour. A cut substantial enough to be dripping blood onto my jeans in about 1-2 seconds.

For me, it was a fairly non-descript looking wound, with all the appearances of being just like any other cut/scratch to the face. It was different in that what would normally have been gone in about a week showed no sign of change after 2 weeks. It was about 3.5 weeks till my face looked normal (for me, that is)

It was not unlike the effects observed when sodium gold cyanide enters an open cut - which happened weekly where I worked at a past job. Non-healing wounds gets old pretty quick.

Funny. If I were to have a daughter, I would be so tempted to name her "Ann Apple".

Why is common sense not common?Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level where they are an expert. Sometimes it takes a lot of work to be lazyPlease stand in front of my pistol, smile and wait for the flash - JSOP 2012